Interstate and International Custody Disputes and Minnesota Law

amanda@ghllawfirm.com (Amanda Maenner) — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 15:43:30 GMT

In many divorce and custody cases involving children, the parties both stay in the state of Minnesota and the courts within the state will continue to make all determinations regarding custody and parenting time for the children. However, there are situations where the parties both move out of state or even out of the country and custody determinations must be made. What happens then?

Minnesota, along with most other states in the US, has adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA). The UCCJEA determines which state will have the ability to make a custody or parenting time determination where more than one state is involved to start, and also it determines who will continue to have control over custody and parenting time determinations for the child’s minority.

The UCCJEA also extends to international custody matters, though these are much more difficult to enforce. Foreign countries have not adopted the UCCJEA and are under little or no obligation to follow it. If the foreign country determines under its law that the child custody matters may be determined in its jurisdiction, it may assert jurisdiction and take over the decisions. This would be likely in a case where the child has moved with a parent, with the consent of the other parent or the court, to a foreign country and has been residing there.

Interstate and international custody matters are very complex and are not something that most individuals are able to handle without an attorney. It involves state, international and foreign law, and often will involve attorneys from both countries to navigate through the system.

Medical Malpractice in Pennsylvania - Part 2

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 13:00:50 GMT

In this video, Anthony Zabicki, Shareholder in Stark & Stark's Accident & Personal Injury Group, discusses the various issues you need to consider if you or a loved on are every involved in a medical malpractice case. Mr. Zabicki also discusses the necessary components for a successful medical malpractice case such as the assistance of medical experts and health care professionals.

Medical Malpractice - Part 2 from Stark & Stark on Vimeo.

Shared parenting? No child support? Not so fast...

Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:11:29 GMT

In New Hampshire, more and more parents share joint residential responsibility for children, sharing equally in the parenting time. Many people may assume that if parents share equally in the time with the children, then they will have equal expenses and therefore neither party would pay child support to the other. However, the general philosophy of the court system says not so fast. The law holds that equal parenting time in and of itself will not negate the obligation for child support. If two parents earn substantially different incomes, then the parent with the higher income is often ordered to pay child support to the other parent.

For example, John and Jane are divorcing. They have two children, and will share time with the children in a week on/week off schedule. John is a mechanic who earns $50,000 per year. Jane is a teacher’s aide, and earns $25,000 per year. The New Hampshire Child Support Guidelines, if John were the obligor (person paying the child support) would require child support in the amount of $1,051 per month. If Jane were the obligor, the guidelines would require her to pay $571 in child support per month. Often, a court will look at the difference between those to figures, in this case $480, and order the parent with the higher salary to pay that figure as child support to the other parent. Here, John’s child support liability is probably between $450 and $750 per month, depending on other factors like property division, debt, expenses for the children and alimony.

The statutory frame work for the child support guidelines, and adjustments to those guidelines, can be found at RSA 458-C. The court will consider the following specific factors in making an order for child support:

·         Whether, in cases of equal or approximately equal residential responsibility, the parties have agreed to the specific apportionment of variable expenses for the children, including but not limited to education, school supplies, day care, after school, vacation and summer care, extracurricular activities, clothing, health insurance costs and uninsured health costs, and other child-related expenses.

·         Whether the obligor parent has established that the equal or approximately equal residential responsibility will result in a reduction of any of the fixed costs of child rearing incurred by the obligee parent.

·         Whether the income of the lower earning parent enables that parent to meet the costs of child rearing in a similar or approximately equal style to that of the other parent.

If you are involved in a child support case, it is important to get the facts and information that you need for your case. Often, that means hiring an experienced and knowledgeable attorney to represent you in court. Please consider contacting Crusco Law Office, PLLC to explore your options for representation.

Sudden Divorce Syndrome: Reality or Myth?

Mon, 30 Aug 2010 18:51:30 GMT

Sudden Divorce Syndrome: If you are shocked that your spouse wants a divorce after many years of marriage, you may be a victim of SDS. Chip Hues and Donna Ferber debate the topic in Chip's excellent blog called Ohio Family Law Blog Chip has permitted me to reproduce his blog below for your reading pleasure. It's worth a read. Thanks Chip!

I am pleased that Donna Ferber, a psychotherapist and a frequent contributor to the Ohio Family Law Blog has agreed to co-author this article with me! Our goal is to present both the legal and emotional perspectives of a trend that we are seeing in our professional practices: long term marriages ending by divorce when the wife has come to the conclusion that she has just “had enough” and that the husband is seemingly caught “blindsided” by the situation. The intent of the article is not a male versus female point and counterpoint, but rather a collaborative discourse that can provide insight into the complexity of the issues.

My legal analysis is in regular black font and Donna’s perspective as a psychotherapist is in blue italics…

Having been a divorce lawyer for over 30 years, I see recurring themes in many of my cases. Statistics show that there will be about a million divorces in the United States this year. About 75% are filed by women. More of my male clients are telling me that they are completely “blind-sided” by the divorce situation. These are individuals in long-term marriages who have honored their wedding vows, are not abusers, and had not been separated. This scenario is becoming so common that some lawyers and psychologists have given it a name: “Sudden Divorce Syndrome.”

While it is true that women may file more often than men, it does not necessarily follow that they WANT a divorce. They simply have surrendered the hope that the marital relationship can change. It is only after years of feeling ignored, devalued, invisible and unheard, do women finally pull the plug and file for divorce. The term, “Sudden Divorce Syndrome,” implies that women throw out their marriage as impulsively as they change shoes. A man may be shocked by the news that his wife wants “out” but that doesn’t mean she hasn’t given plenty of warning. It usually means he wasn’t listening. “Sudden Divorce Syndrome” assumes impulsive behavior on the part of the woman. Nothing is further from the truth. Perhaps a better term would be “Shocked Divorce Syndrome.” That certainly is an accurate description of these men who find themselves blindsided.

I have represented both the man and woman in these situations. Here are my impressions of what I am seeing. Men and women think and react very differently. Often, the woman will monitor the relationship for a period, and will by nature attempt to fix it. The man may perceive this as nagging or complaining. The man then may become more distant and withdrawn. As time passes, without counseling, neither party is happy and their needs become unmet. The wife may suppress her feelings for a period in hopes that the situation will change. Ultimately, the wife concludes that her only choice for happiness is to separate and to file for divorce. The man is caught unaware of the situation, and even if he offers to change, he has missed that opportunity. The woman says that she has become tired of “talking to the wall.” When I inquire of her what is wrong she will answer, “Everything.”

As a psychotherapist in private practice for 25 years I see this happen with regularity. The struggle and ambivalence women experience about leaving their marriage cannot be overstated. And often they struggle for a really long time. When I ask women “how long have you been unhappy?” I find that most respond with a time line that represents roughly half the life of the marriage. In other words, a woman who is married for 20 years will often say she has been unhappy for 10 years. Again, there is nothing sudden about these decisions. Women don’t leave on a whim. On the contrary, many of them stay too long.

Prior to seeking a divorce, they frequently show up in my office on the referral of their family physician. They have headaches, digestive problems, insomnia, depression or anxiety. These can be symptoms of living in an untenable relationship for years. These physical ailments are manifestations of what happens when we live our lives in a way that goes against our value system. It puts us “ill at ease” or in “dis-ease” and when we make change to remedy the situation, these ailments often abate. I have heard countless women exclaim, “I had no idea how much stress I was living with, until I ended my marriage.”

According to an article, Sudden Divorce Syndrome, written by John Sedgwick in BestLife Magazine, one in four men who were divorced in the previous year said they “never saw it coming. These statistics are supported by an AARP poll. Only 14 percent of divorced women said they experienced the same unexpected shock. Dr Lori Buckley says, “The warning signs are usually there, but the male mind is simply not very adept at recognizing them. When women make up their mind that the relationship is over, they stop talking about the relationship. Men interpret a woman’s lack of complaining as satisfaction. But more often, it’s because she’s simply given up.” And just because a man has been married for a long time and has been a good financial provider, there is no reason to assume all is well. That is exactly when divorce statistics swell. Many women, as they approach age 40, believe it’s now or never for getting their life back on track. It’s the same phenomenon as older wealthy men trading in their long-time partners for trophy wives, only it’s the women who are dropping their men. To read more of Mr. Sedgwick’s opinions on this topic and how he believes that men pay a premium in emotional cost in divorce, click here.

I can’t agree more that men interpret a lack of complaining as satisfaction. However, if we examine those statistics they are, in fact, not very different. One in four is actually 25% which is not so dramatically different than 14%! In truth, women are as likely to overlook their husband’s dissatisfaction. Frequently men feel ignored and replaced by their wife’s dedication to children. The women is then blindsided when the man decides to divorce or she discovers an affair. Men and women often take each other for granted, minimize problems, over focus on career, money issues or child- rearing. It is well documented and obvious to the casual observer that most couples spend more time watching television or on the internet than engaging in dialogue. Both sexes hold responsibility for this lapse in connection.

Dr. Ned Hostein, MD., a Harvard-trained public health specialist and the Board Chairman of Fathers and Families, explains that there is a physical toll from divorce brought on by excess stress. He notes: “The top 5 causes of human stress are: 1) the death of a child 2) the loss of a spouse 3) the loss of a home 4) serious financial woes and 5) losing a relationship with a child…Four of these five are involved when someone goes through a divorce… According to a study done by the American Journal of Psychiatry, blood pressure and cholesterol levels rise and the risk of heart disease and coronary failure increases sharply. Other problems associated with Sudden Divorce Syndrome include diabetes and cirrhosis of the liver, in part because distraught people may turn to unhealthy behaviors, like drinking, after a break up. Statistically, divorced men are nine times more likely to commit suicide than divorced women!”

I question the above statistics. If Sudden Divorce Syndrome is not even a recognized diagnosis then how can we attribute diabetes or cirrhosis to its existence? Diabetes is clearly related to obesity and poor diet choices and cirrhosis often occurs after years of abusing alcohol.

I also would like to provide another resource regarding life stressors. According to Answers.com

, the top 10 stress situations are:

Death of spouse
Divorce
Marital separation
Jail term or death of close family member
Personal injury or illness
Marriage
Loss of job due to termination
Marital reconciliation or retirement
Pregnancy
Change in financial state

While divorce is stressful, I think we do a disservice to all involved when we skew the information. All parties feel badly enough without frightening them with distorted statistics. Furthermore, if you look at the above list, you will see that stress also results from “happy” occasions. Stress is a part of life. We cannot avoid it, but we can learn to deal with it in healthier ways. Excess food and abuse of alcohol are examples of unhealthy coping choices. Let’s be clear- people have choices in their behavior. It is not a foregone conclusion that everyone who divorces gets cirrhosis or diabetes! Let’s not paint pictures of victims of divorce. Let’s encourage healthy choices and support empowerment and resilience.

Typically, the husband will often believe it is fundamentally unfair that the wife should receive half their married property and retirement account, and often spousal support. His entire plan for “enjoying retirement” is dramatically altered. These cases are very difficult for the abandoned spouse.

Each partner actually experiences two divorces. One is the legal divorce and the other is the emotional divorce. While the couple experience the legal divorce on the same time line, the emotional divorce happens on individual time lines. So, the woman who says” I am done” is emotionally divorced before she begins the legal process. She may present as logical, cool and “all business”. Her husband may see her as unfeeling and heartless. Her detachment indicates she is emotionally divorced. He may, on the other hand, not even have begun to work on the emotional process of divorce. I have seen this in reverse as well. The man has emotionally “moved on” and the woman doesn’t know what has hit her. The chasm created by the gap in their emotional process can often play out in the legal area. In short, the further apart a couple is in their emotional uncoupling process, the more likely an acrimonious legal divorce

The best advice I can offer is to seek the services of an excellent marriage counselor as early as possible if you have any suspicion that your spouse has become disenchanted or withdrawn. Discuss it candidly, and with professional help you may be able to work through the issue. If your wife is bringing up the same recurring marital issues, you had better pay attention. And my advice to men is to stop living in a fantasy world. The complaints may or may not be valid, however they are real to your wife, and you’re going to have some major problems if you ignore them. Don’t wait until the process server slaps a divorce complaint in your hand!

Over the years in my practice I have heard “Marriage counseling doesn’t work”. The problem is not that it doesn’t work, but that marriage therapy is not a miracle cure. If you have physical symptoms, the sooner you seek medical help, the less drastic, prolonged, painful and costly your treatment will be. The same is true for a marriage showing symptoms of distress. The sooner you address the problem, the more likely the marriage can be saved. One final piece of advice, if your partner says he/she is having a problem, just because you don’t think there is a problem, doesn’t mean you should ignore the situation. In a marriage if one person is unhappy, then something is wrong and help from a professional should be sought out as soon as possible. Don’t wait until you are dragging the corpse of your marriage into a therapist’s office.

Donna F. Ferber, LPC, LADC, is a licensed psychotherapist in Connecticut and the author of From Ex-Wife to Exceptional Life: A Woman’s Journey through Divorce, which won an Honorable Mention Award by the Independent Publishers Association. To read more about the author and her work, please visit www.donnaferber.com

Attorney Robert L. Mues is the author of "Divorce in Ohio", featured in "Who's Who in American Law", and is also the managing partner of Dayton, Ohio law firm, Holzfaster, Cecil, McKnight & Mues.

NJ DIVORCE MEDIATION ATTORNEY SUMMIT SPRINGFIELD WESTFIELD CRANFORD

ccaesq@att.net (Charles C. Abut) — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 17:33:13 GMT

Can you obtain a restraining order against excessive FaceBook "friending"? "Order [wife's attorney] to stop harassing me via email...Plaintiff alleges that the attorney invited him on two occasions while plaintiff was out of the country to become his friend on...

Can you obtain a restraining order against excessive FaceBook "friending"? "Order [wife's attorney] to stop harassing me via email...Plaintiff alleges that the attorney invited him on two occasions while plaintiff was out of the country to become his friend on Facebook." Hoffman v. Griffin, New Jersey App. Div., September 2, 2010

NJ DIVORCE MEDIATION LAWYER MORRISTOWN MADISON FLORHAM PARK CHATHAM COHABITATION

ccaesq@att.net (Charles C. Abut) — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 16:57:18 GMT

"Plaintiff and defendant met in 1999, when they became line-dancing partners. Shortly thereafter, they fell in love and began 'a very romantic, intimate relationship[.]' The parties decided to live together." Trohalides v. Machat, New Jersey App. Div., August 31, 2010

NJ DIVORCE MEDIATOR LIVINGSTON CALDWELL VERONA CEDAR GROVE ALIMONY MODIFICATION

ccaesq@att.net (Charles C. Abut) — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 16:44:15 GMT

The New Jersey divorce judge had it half right. Although he correctly found that the ex-husband had experienced a financial downturn in his bookbinding business, it was wrong to deny a plenary hearing to resolve the contested issues. Eick v....

NJ DIVORCE MEDIATION ATTORNEY HACKENSACK ENGLEWOOD TEANECK TENAFLY

ccaesq@att.net (Charles C. Abut) — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 15:51:23 GMT

What happens when a New Jersey lawyer represents himself in his own New Jersey divorce case? Agrait v. Boas, New Jersey App. Div., August 27, 2010

What happens when a New Jersey lawyer represents himself in his own New Jersey divorce case? Agrait v. Boas, New Jersey App. Div., August 27, 2010

The Parties, The Lawyers, the Judge and Uncle Sam: The Key Players in Most Divorces

Mon, 30 Aug 2010 00:25:35 GMT

Many divorces involve alimony, child support and the division of assets - all of which involve taxation issues. Litigants tend to overlook the impact that these provisions will have on their taxes. As lawyers, however, we consistently take the tax consequences into account in determining what is fair and equitable under the circumstances.

Alimony payments are considered income for the person to whom the payments are made, and are deductible to the person who's making the payments. If the parties are in different tax brackets, the government may wind up subsidizing part of the alimony payment.

In contrast to alimony, child support payments are not considered as income to the person receiving the payments, nor are payments deductible to the person making the payment. As a result, child support payments do not have any tax consequences at all. Important, however, if alimony is also an issue, to run the child support numbers and compare available cash - as opposed to gross income - in determining need versus ability to pay.

The sale of the marital homestead does not typically involve a taxable event. Capital gains up to $500,000 from the sale of the homestead will be not subject to taxation, if you have lived there for two of the last five years.

If you choose to transfer title to the residence, allowing your spouse to retain the equity, no taxable event occurs. Many clients will opt to use the home equity as an offset against alimony payments, avoiding tax issues altogether.

However, if you want to adjust the property division in a way that allows both partners to retain equal equity in assets, there may be sizable tax consequence to consider. For example, if one spouse retains the marital homestead and offers the other a retirement account in exchange for his/her share of equity in the house, the resulting settlement may not be fair to the one who takes the retirement account. That's because if this spouse wants to access his retirement account funds, they cannot do so without incurring a tax liability. As a result, when you factor in the tax liability, the person who received the retirement account could actually end up with a lower settlement.

Simply put, a dollar of equity in a home is worth a dollar on the street. A dollar in a 401(k) plan is worth, perhaps, 70 cents on the street. For that reason, we always consider the net value of a particular asset in creating an equal property settlement.

ESSEX COUNTY NJ DIVORCE MEDIATION ATTORNEY VALUATION FORENSICS

ccaesq@att.net (Charles C. Abut) — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 17:35:27 GMT

The critical importance of a forensic financial investigation during a New Jersey divorce case is at the heart of this complex case. Anton v. Anton, New Jersey App. Div., August 26, 2010

The critical importance of a forensic financial investigation during a New Jersey divorce case is at the heart of this complex case. Anton v. Anton, New Jersey App. Div., August 26, 2010

HUDSON COUNTY NJ DIVORCE MEDIATION ATTORNEY

ccaesq@att.net (Charles C. Abut) — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:54:30 GMT

The ex-husband's motion to decrease support was denied because he failed to provide a copy of the support order in question, failed to attach a Child Support Guidelines worksheet and failed to provide either a current or a prior Case...

UNION COUNTY NJ DIVORCE MEDIATOR ARBITRATOR LAWYER

ccaesq@att.net (Charles C. Abut) — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:19:21 GMT

Ordinarily, a motion for reconsideration in a New Jersey divorce case must be made within 20 days. But this deadline does not apply to interlocutory orders. Spennato v. Spennato, New Jersey App. Div., August 24, 2010

Ordinarily, a motion for reconsideration in a New Jersey divorce case must be made within 20 days. But this deadline does not apply to interlocutory orders. Spennato v. Spennato, New Jersey App. Div., August 24, 2010

To Sue or Not to Sue: Determining when bringing suit is worth the time and expense - and when is it an expensive exercise in futility - Part 1

Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:05:23 GMT

As most people are aware, litigating can be an expensive, time consuming, and unpleasant experience. I find that an important part of competently counseling clients or prospective involves helping them determine whether bringing suit is a good economic decision. I find that achieving a successful result for my clients involves taking the time to make a sober assessment of his or her claims, and dispelling myths about litigation which may distort the client’s decision making process in determining whether to proceed with a law suit. It is best for the lawyer and the client to discuss these aspects of the client’s claims before the decision to go forward with litigation is made.

Attorney’s Fees
Very often, clients will come to a lawyer soon after a dispute – looking to bring suit in order to win “justice” for a perceived wrong done to them. Just as often, these clients come to believe that the “justice system” is a misnomer because they are surprised to learn that winning “justice” can mean paying more in costs and fees than a judgment is worth. Many critics of the American Court system fault the “American Rule” for this belief that justice is often denied due to the costs and expense of pursuing a legitimate claim against a defense that appears to be less than meritorious. The “American Rule” employed in most American Courts holds that for most claims each party will bear the expense of Court costs and their respective attorney’s fees. This is contrasted with the “English Rule,” employed in the Courts of the United Kingdom and most Commonwealth countries, which provides that the loser in a case that proceeds through trial bears the expense of all costs and the winning party’s attorney’s fees in addition to its own.

Other than the customary contingent fee arrangements in personal injury and worker’s compensation claims, or specific fee shifting statutes, most claims will require that each party bear its own attorney’s fees and costs. The attorney’s fees and costs that will accrue during litigation are the major out of pocket expenses which must be weighed against the potential dollar value of any judgment, the likelihood of success at trial, and what I call the “collectability” of that judgment.

Potential Dollar Value of the Judgment
The next important factor to be weighed in determining whether to proceed with a lawsuit is the potential Dollar value of the judgment sought. I list this factor second because the comparison of attorney’s fees and costs against the maximum potential value of a judgment – a “homerun” – will often bring matters into perspective for the client considering pursuing litigation. Contrary to what many people may believe, damages in most kinds of cases are limited to an amount necessary to compensate the aggrieved party for his or her losses - and for only those losses that are reasonably foreseeable. Generally, Courts will not award a judgment for damages that are causally remote and merely consequential to the defendant’s conduct if the class of damages was not reasonably foreseeable by both parties. Punitive damages – damages imposed by the Court to punish and deter particularly malicious conduct – are only available under certain specific circumstances, and even more rarely awarded by Courts and Juries. A realistic assessment of the damages suffered by the client for which he or she may receive compensation is indispensable in making the decision to pursue a claim in litigation.

MORRIS COUNTY NJ DIVORCE ATTORNEY AND MEDIATOR

ccaesq@att.net (Charles C. Abut) — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:32:06 GMT

The ex-wife's legal malpractice suit against both her prior divorce attorneys was dismissed by the trial court. Here, that dismissal is affirmed. Gere v. Frank Louis, John DeBartolo, et al., New Jersey App. Div., August 23, 2010

The ex-wife's legal malpractice suit against both her prior divorce attorneys was dismissed by the trial court. Here, that dismissal is affirmed. Gere v. Frank Louis, John DeBartolo, et al., New Jersey App. Div., August 23, 2010

How Do I Get a Texas Divorce?

Thu, 26 Aug 2010 22:03:59 GMT

Michelle May O'Neil of Dallas Family Law firm O'Neil Attorneys Family Law, posted an article on JD Supra called How Do I Get a Texas Divorce?

SUMMARY: Although it is highly unlikely anyone enters into a marriage with the thought that divorce will be the inevitable end to the union, the unfortunate reality is that many people will have to endure the pain of divorce. Statistics tell us that about half of all first marriages will end in divorce. However, in Dallas area divorces alone, the divorce rate has been closer to 60 percent for first marriages and climbs to 75 percent for second marriages!

A divorce is a lawsuit to dissolve the legal marriage relationship. A divorce encompasses many different issues including the division of property and debts, and what legal rights each parent will have to the children. Keep in mind that a divorce generally only dissolves the legal relationship. Many religions also have requirements about how to dissolve a marriage from a religious standpoint.

For those that have reached the point where divorce is the last remaining option, questions are likely more prevalent than answers. This article helps answer the question about How To Get A Texas Divorce.

Thoughts on Seminar - How to Keep Tax-Exempt Organizations in Compliance

Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:28:53 GMT

On August 25, 2010, I served on the faculty of a National Business Institute seminar focused on keeping tax exempt organizations in compliance relevant with tax law. I personally spoke about annual reporting requirements, complying with rules on disclosures to potential donees when soliciting donations, appealing a revocation of tax exempt status and intermediate sanctions.

Of particular interest to many in attendance was the ability to use the IRS Form 990 as a fundraising tool. Last September, I posted about this topic and discussed how non-profits can use the 990 to effectively convey their mission and several of their largest projects to the donating public.

Because of the tough economy, those in attendance were also interested in creative fundraising techniques. We discussed the potential pitfalls of straying from the organization’s mission to increase donations, such as the unrelated business income tax, the prohibition against private inurement, the private benefit doctrine and intermediate sanctions.

The attendees were also very interested in methods of educating their Board members about the compliance rules. We discussed implementing a conflict of interest policy designed to ensure that the non-profit organization is not dealing with a third party that is somehow related to a Board member or officer. Another good practice is requiring Board members and officers to sign annual statements that they received the conflict of interest policy, understand the policy and agree to comply.

While tax topics can be tedious for some, I genuinely enjoyed the opportunity to present on this subject and answer questions from various nonprofit representatives. It was rewarding to see so many people willing to put in the time and effort to help their tax exempt organization carry out its mission.

How Collaborative Practices Saves Money in NJ and Ontario

Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:24:50 GMT

Linda L. Piff, a respected lawyer and blogger in New Jersey, writes in her blog, reproduced below, that Collaborative Practice is far more cost effective than litigation.

Although most family law cases do eventually settle, they do so on the court house steps after most of the damage of litigation has occurred. The inflammatory court papers have been filed and become a public record, large sums of money have been spent on litigation and the children become victims of the divorce process.

Collaborative divorce in a relatively new concept for New Jersey. It was approved by the Supreme Court as a way for parties to divorce on December 5, 2005. While relatively new, collaborative practitioners are experiencing a demand for this way to divorce.

In a collaborative case, the parties agree not to litigate from the onset. Unlike mediation, which uses a neutral as the only professional in the dispute resolution process, in a collaborative case each party is represented by an attorney. The value for clients is that they avoid the damage that is done through litigation and save the expense of the lengthy court room battle.

What can be said with confidence is that no other kind of professional conflict resolution assistance is consistently as efficient or economical as collaborative law for as broad a range of clients. While the cost of attorney fees cannot be predicted accurately, a rule of thumb is that collaborative law representation will cost from one-third to one-half as much as being represented conventionally by a lawyer who takes issues in your case to court.

Our experience in Ontario is the same. Collaborative practice is a far more efficient and cost-effective way of getting through your divorce. Learn more about Collaborative Practice.

HACKENSACK NJ FAMILY LITIGATION SANCTIONS LAWYER & MEDIATOR

ccaesq@att.net (Charles C. Abut) — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 15:14:53 GMT

A New Jersey judge has just ordered a frivolous litigation sanction of $1.96 million in the case involving Ron Perelman, acting as the executor of his ex-wife, Claudia Cohen. Cohen et al. v. Cohen et al., New Jersey Ch. Div.,...

A New Jersey judge has just ordered a frivolous litigation sanction of $1.96 million in the case involving Ron Perelman, acting as the executor of his ex-wife, Claudia Cohen. Cohen et al. v. Cohen et al., New Jersey Ch. Div., August 20, 2010

Medical Malpractice and the Mental Health Procedures Act

Wed, 25 Aug 2010 13:08:44 GMT

The Mental Health Procedures Act (MPHA) establishes the procedures for the treatment of mentally ill patients in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Of course, medical malpractice can and does occur to mentally ill patients in Pennsylvania who are subject to the MPHA under a 301 or 302 commitment. The typical Plaintiff in a medical malpractice will have committed suicide while being treated at a facility pursuant to the MHPA

Unfortunately for mentally ill patients who are subject to the MHPA, the standard for pursing a medical malpractice claim is higher than a “regular” medical malpractice claim. The MHPA grants limited immunity to healthcare providers. Specifically, the MHPA provides, in pertinent part:

In the absence of willful misconduct or gross negligence, a county administrator, a director of a facility, a physician, a peace officer or any other authorized person who participates in a decision that a person be examined or treated under this act, or that a person be discharged or placed under partial hospitalization, outpatient care or leave of absence, or that the restraint upon such person be otherwise reduced, or a county administrator or other authorized person who denies an application for voluntary treatment or for involuntary emergency examination and treatment, shall not be civilly or criminally liable for such decision or for any of its consequences.

50 P.S. § 7114(a). The granting of limited immunity to healthcare providers who provide services to mentally ill patients represents the legislature’s policy decision to ameliorate certain risks associated with providing these services in an “unscientific and inexact field” in order to facilitate the rendering of care to mentally ill patients in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Allen v. Montgomery Hosp., 696 A.2d 1175, 1178-79 (Pa. 1997).

In order to overcome the limited immunity provision of § 7114(a), a plaintiff must demonstrate gross negligence on the part of the healthcare provider. In Bloom v. Dubois Regional Med. Ctr., 597 A.2d 671 (Pa. Super. 1991), the Superior Court explained and defined the term of “gross negligence” as it applies to the MHPA as follows:

It appears that the legislature intended to require that liability be premised on facts indicating more egregiously deviant conduct than ordinary carelessness, inadvertence, laxity or indifference. We hold that the legislature intended the term gross negligence where the facts support substantially more than ordinary carelessness, inadvertence, laxity and indifference. The behavior must be flagrant, grossly deviating from the ordinary standard of care.

Id. at 679 (emphasis added). See also Albright v. Abington Memorial Hosp., 696 A.2d 1159, 1164 (Pa. 1997) (adopting and affirming the Bloom definition for gross negligence) (emphasis added).

Additionally, the limited immunity provided by § 7114(a) extends to injuries suffered by third parties at the hands of mental health patients. See Goryeb v. Com., 575 A.2d 545, 549 (Pa. Super. 1990). For example, if you were injured by another patient in a hospital setting as a result of a hospital’s negligence in failing to supervise that patient and that patient was there subject to the MHPA, you would need to prove gross negligence against the hospital in order to recover for that injury.

Motions for Reconsideration

amanda@ghllawfirm.com (Amanda Maenner) — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 23:00:53 GMT

Almost always when parties go to court and the judge makes his or her decision, someone will not be happy with the results. That is why it is preferred by the court that parties resolve their disputes without needing its involvement. What can be done if you are the party that is not happy?

In motions made in family court, if a party does not like the results of an order, they are able to request via letter a Motion for Reconsideration (Rule 115.11 of the General Rules of Practice). The letter must not exceed 2 pages in length and must describe compelling circumstances that exist as to why the order was wrong. If the court agrees with the reasoning set out in the letter, they may either just issue an amended order or allow the party that wrote the letter to bring a motion to reconsider the previous order and be heard by the court.

Motions for reconsideration are not often successful. The judge is deliberate in the decisions that are issued, and you are not able to bring new information that you previously had to the court through your motion to reconsider. The high standard of needing compelling circumstances provides some validity to orders that are issued by the court. Parties are able to rely on an order being enforceable and can have some finality to the issue that was brought before the court. If there is new information that has been found since the parties appeared in court, it may be appropriate to bring an entirely new motion on the subject.

Recent Articles in Divorce & Family Law from LexMonitor